Nintendo’s been involved in its fair share of legal battles over the years, but we have a feeling it might be thinking twice before taking on publisher Pix Arts over the recent release of Monkey Kong In New-York on the Nintendo Switch.
Granted, Nintendo can do whatever it likes, and if it thinks there’s even the slightest chance that it might win a legal case, then chances are it will send its ninjas to battle at the earliest opportunity. What’s interesting about this particular game, however, is that it reminds us of a previous legal battle fought between Nintendo and Universal back in 1983.
Y’see, back in't day, Universal wound up suing Nintendo over the latter’s new Donkey Kong game, alleging that it was a copyright infringement upon the characters and plot of King Kong. After a seven-day trial, the late judge Robert W. Sweet determined that Universal had no trademark in King Kong, deeming that the company itself had proven the IP to be in the public domain during a previous court case against RKO General. Furthermore, he said it’s unlikely that consumers would genuinely mix up King Kong and Donkey Kong.
Nintendo’s defence lawyer at the time, the late John Kirby, was gifted a $30,000 sailboat christened ‘Donkey Kong’ for his work during the case. As many of you may already know, his surname was also used as inspiration for the long-running platforming franchise Kirby.
Now, if Nintendo even notices Monkey Kong in New-York on the Switch eShop (because let’s face it, it’s a small drop in a big ocean given the amount of bilge being uploaded these days), it may have to think long and hard about whether it wants to pursue legal action against this particular game given the hassle it had to go through back in ‘83.
The big difference here, of course, is that Nintendo does own the trademark to Donkey Kong – obviously – and the similarities between ‘Donkey Kong’ and ‘Monkey Kong’ are arguably much closer than that of King Kong. In addition, the game’s logo is somewhat similar to that of Donkey Kong’s, but we’re not sure anybody would look at the generic character model for the titular character and mistake it for Nintendo’s famous, lovable ape.
Chances are that if Nintendo wants Monkey Kong in New-York removed from the eShop, it can probably do so with little fuss, and we sincerely doubt a case such as this would make it all the way to court. Still, it’s interesting to look at the similarities to the ‘83 case, right?
What do you make of this new 'Monkey Kong' game? Do you think it will remain on the eShop, or are its days numbered? Let us know your thoughts with a comment down below.
Comments 29
Legal or not, the design is so ugly and derivative it’s an offense on good taste.
Literally that ape design hurts my eyes.
Shovelware? They have stolen the spinning sound effect of Samus from Super Metroid... What is that autorunner anyway? Even as a joke I wouldn't buy it.
It could've been a neat Rampage style game.
Regardless of Nintendo eventually taking it down potentially, I wish customers paid more attention and/or made a quick research before making purchases first and foremost - there's no way you'd mistake this for Donkey Kong if that were the case!
@JohnnyMind I really hope the next iteration of the e-shop allowed a thumb up system.
Not sure if that 'monkey' is just very badly drawn or ai generated. Could go either way honestly.
@G_and_Thomas Anything that allows customers to make informed purchases so absolutely including such a system and also filters, blocking certain games and/or developers etc. to let them to personalize what they see in their eShops would be welcome - what I hope we won't see on the other hand is stricter requirements for games to be put on the eShop as that could affect (also) legitimate games instead of scam ones!
I wouldn't call their lawyers ninjas, more like mafia. They have no problems using the grey area or indeed illegal intimidation to get their way. And its clear they do not care about the video game industry as they are more than happy to stifle and ruin future innovation (so long as they remain the kings) by trying to start patenting game mechanics. If they get their way with that, you'll see the industry collapse within 10 years. Go Palworld!
I'm starting to see where Big N got their "Sue them all" mentality. Like an abused child grows up to be the abuser. It's a viscous cycle.
It happens to "look" like it might infringe upon Donkey Kong, but it doesn't ape the exact playstyles of either Donkey Kong style game. So I honestly don't think anything will happen in this case.
@Agenerationofgens Just cause it's legal where you live doesn't mean the same where they are. Palworld got sue cause they are in the same turf and break the very law that binds there. You only see this from your perspective which is why you don't understand why they are in the wrong. Had Pocketpair originate from another region with this same idea then they wouldn't get caught in this mess.
Anyone else notice that when people talk about games companies, they often use the pronoun "they," ("Sega are hard at work on a new Crazy Taxi, and they know the stakes are high for this release,") but Nintendo is usually referred to as "it?" (Nintendo is gearing up for a legal battle that it knows it will likely win.")
Honestly, I thought calling groups if people "it" was kind of an American English thing, and I'd just gotten used to the way others speak.
@-wc- Ha, that's become a bit of a bugbear since I've gotten into this whole thing. I get why people say 'they' and 'are', because they're likely referring to the employees that make up the company. But the company itself is a singular entity. Hence why we say 'it', etc. We (try to) do it for all developers and publishers, not just Nintendo.
I'm suddenly reminded of the band "A"'s seminal album, "A vs. Monkey Kong".
PSA, it's not a monkey it's an ape
@AllieKitsune I love Lake Tahoe too.
Saw another monkey-based ripoff game last night: Wukong Sun - Black Legend
@robotreptile Gotta love the drop shadow and complete inability to properly cut around the edges
King Kong predates Donkey Kong.
Not everything under the sun is trying to copy Nintendo.
Nintendo themselves approved the title. You can surmise that from it being on the eShop?
@Olliemar28
I totally get it! Semantically, is a company a single entity, or is it a group of people?
I am a staunchly "people first" oriented person. I think of a "company" (note: another meaning of the word "company" is more than one person) as a group of people in association with an aligned goal. (association, another word for "group of people.")
There was a time that I preferred "is" aesthetically, as it seems "cleaner" on the page and on the tongue. But, as my personal sense of ethics has evolved, I've grown to prefer language that acknowledges humanity, and the reality that a "company" is the sum of the people that work there.
another way to look at it: "is" would be the more corporate construct ("corpus," as in a separate body to the people that work there) with "are" being more pragmatic.
"Sega're what Nintendo's."
thanks for listening! and taking the time! I will always enjoy reading your work, regardless of the minutia that i will likely continue to ponder 😆
...Someone at NL should do a video on this game. lol
Anybody watched gameplay of this? It's hilarious.
@OldManHermit oh, it's most assuredly an AI-drawn slop. A lot of telltale signs.
People will know it isn't a Nintendo title because it doesn't cost 50 quid!
That looks like I drew it.
That isn't a compliment.
@G_and_Thomas Funny you should mention that? I thought "Monkey Kong" looked more like George from Rampage too!
What manner of eldritch abomination is that??
-Called Monkey Kong
-Main character isn't a Donkey
Smh
It's so weird that "game" is actually up on the eShop. Doesn't Nintendo have any employees at all that actually does some checking on the games that goes up there?
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...